The breaking news is that U.S. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords of Arizona was assassinated by a gunman only an hour ago, and the news wires are alight with the fire of that story. As of right now, there is no indication of who killed the congresswoman or why.
The CBC ran the story here, and allowed their comment board to be open. I want you to see the first comment they approved:
Note that it says comments are pre-moderated. Which means that somebody working for the CBC looked at that ridiculously inappropriate comment accusing the right of supporting acts of murder and terrorism and happily clicked the approve button.
Wake up CBC! Have some integrity!
UPDATE
More comments pre-moderated by the CBC include:
“The consequence of right wing gun nuts and the neo-conservative politics of hate??” — 18 agree 3 disagree
“The Right Wingers will rejoice at this madness.” — 17 agree 17 disagree
“So this is the end result of the Rupert Murdoch Tea Party/Fox news ranting and raving. I wonder who is next.” — 35 agree 16 disagree
“Extremely tragic news. Probably a politically motivated shooting. Is the right so afraid of the left that they have to resort to assassination?” — 23 agree 12 disagree
“Republican extremist. Bush voter. Dangerous.” — 0 votes
What’s worse than that is all the Canadians showing ignorance by proclaiming gun violence some kind of American value.
UPDATE 2
Let’s address this for a moment:
This is the infographic that the left are alleging has incited the (attempted) assassination of a congresswoman. But let’s think about this for a moment, shall we?
Is there anything inherently wrong with identifying, targeting if you will, areas of the country that a political movement believes its members should become active in? Only the most simple-minded person would interpret such an infographic as an invitation to literally assassinate anybody.
“What’s worse than that is all the Canadians showing ignorance by proclaiming gun violence some kind of American value.”
Well, isn’t it? Have you read the news lately?
Katie,
We have gun violence in Canada as well. They have 10 times the population we do. I don’t understand the self-righteous nonsense coming from the Canadian left.
I noticed it as well.Stunning.
It is worth pointing out that the CBC had to change the story. They originally said the congresswoman was dead. This may not be true.
These comments reflect an ignorance that suggests that the Dems. support gun control. They don’t.
They only get a billion dollars a year subsidy so they can be forgiven for this shoddy level of journalism.
Thanks David. I’ve also heard she is alive and in serious condition. I really hope she pulls through.
There is nothing wrong with the comments you object to. Sure, they are silly and unsubstantiated, but so are comments like “liberal judges”. “soft on crime” etc etc – all of which I have seen on CBC blogs.
Gayle, they allege that the right condones murder. They also libel several people and organizations.
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by L. Lea. L. Lea said: RT @canadiancynic: And the floodgates of sanctimonious, defensive outrage open … http://unambig.com/the-cbcs-tasteless-sense-of-modera … [...]
Only the most simple-minded person would interpret such an infographic as an invitation to literally assassinate anybody.
Lots of simple-minded folk about–some armed.
So everything literally interpreted means we cast the blame at the original source? Think of the ramifications.
Adrian
I have heard many comments even on this blog that liberals support terrorists, that liberals support rapists and murderers, and that liberals care more about criminals than they do about victims. People have said that about me, and they have said it about others.
If you sit back and think, these are patently ridiculous comments. As if liberals actually support terrorists. As if anyone actually cares more about murderers than they do for their victims.
But they are all comments that are allowed here and elsewhere. The fact they are stupid and baseless does not stop people from saying them.
You just said:
Now you say:
So which is it? Nothing wrong or stupid and baseless?
Oh, let’s not forget that stuff about how liberals do not care about our troops.
I said in my original comment they were silly and unsubstantiated. What is the difference?
Adrian, may I also say, despite our disagreements on basically everything, that I have noticed the quality of this blog has improved greatly since you started your journalism program. I am impressed, though still unconvinced by your arguments.
Thanks!
Are they all “right-wing kooks”?
“….but so are comments like…..”
But, but, but……..the right says………..
Seriously, Gayle? “There is nothing wrong with the comments you object to”, and you say they are “silly and unsubstantiated”, yet you add the caveat “but” as if that mitigates the fact that the left say stupid and ignorant stuff, too? *SIGH* really, come on now.
Our host here seems to think these comments should be blocked, and I am simply pointing out that these comments are no different from comments making generalized and baseless allegations against the “left” or liberals, which are not blocked.
If it is OK to say liberals do not support our troops, or liberals care more about murderers and rapists than their victims, why is it wrong to say the “right” are gun loving wing nuts and bask in the politics of hate?
And to be clear, I interpret allegations that people do not support our troops to be allegations that people do not care about the safety of our troops, which could also be interpreted as not caring whether they live or die. Which, as I am sure you will agree, is an absolutely terrible thing to say about anyone.
I loved how the left immediately blamed Palin, the TEA party — essentially all right wingers. Since Giffords is a Dem, the shooter must be right wing, right?
Think again: http://mooseandsquirrel.ca/2011/01/08/17:25/congresswoman-giffords-shot-many-on-the-left-immediately-blame-palin-hit/
Of course, unlike the left, I won’t blame this nut’s politics; he’s simply unstable.
On another note… The CBC refuses to post my comment, but they let the moonbat slander stand.
I’ve experienced the same thing at times. My comment requesting the CBC close comments on a story about a family dying in a car crash went unheeded, even as anonymous cowards speculated about how bad driving caused the tragedy.
RE: Palin’s graphic and the Left’s (very) selective reality:
http://www.verumserum.com/?p=13647
Report from the hospital is she survived surgery, and they expect her to make a full recovery. But, as the bullet is supposed to have gone thru her brain, I wonder what that recovery will be. A Judge is dead, as is a 9 yr old child.
Re supporting terrorists etc, who voted against the terrorist bill, who wants Omar back in Canada, who has voted against every crime bill, and who is against jets for our military.
Imagine the bleeding hearts out to defend the shooter if he was a muslim or black.
And the congresswoman used to be a republican, and is in favor of the 2nd amendment, and owns her own gun.
She has been attacked before today.
And when two nut jobs blew up a government building in Oklahoma, people immediately blamed Muslim terrorists.
That works both ways Natasha.
Thanks for proving my point Mary.
Who brought in the terrorism bill. Maybe the NDP voted against every crime bill but the liberals certainly did not. Which party brought in minimum sentences for gun crimes, DNA registry, sex offender registry, anti-stalking legislation, revamped the drug crimes, toughened up the minimum sentences for violent youth crimes? Which party offered to fast track the age of consent legislation only to be rebuked by Harper?
Which party’s crime legislation is basically simplistic bills to increase mandatory minimums, most of which said party killed over and over again before it was finally passed.
Maybe try to learn the facts before spouting drivel.
Pardon me, but I didn’t start finger pointing any direction when it happened — all the finger pointing came directly from the left who immediately jumped to the conclusion that the shooter was a Palin-lovin’, gun-clinging, right-wing loonie. Right wingers blogging and tweeting about this tragedy, on the other hand, were all about prayers for the victims. The left wingers were all about blame Palin, the TEA party and all conservatives.
What? Where? On what planet?? Yes, I’m saying you made that up to try to establish some sort of moral equivalence.
Just in case you forgot, 1995 was before 9-11 and long before *anyone* in America (at any rate) even gave a second thought to Muslims.
Hell, even after the WTC and Cole bombings nobody leaped to that conclusion (that Muslims are automatically responsible for terrorism), so spare me your feeble attempt at re-writing history. (Especially in what was a basically pre-Internet world, where you coudln’t possibly know that. I know it because the papers, at the time, never uttered the word “Muslim” or “Islam”.
IN FACT, even the last few, near-miss, attacks were pinned on the right by the left, initially: the NYC fuel bomb and the NYC cabbie attack. And yet here we are again, w/ someone trying to play moral equivalence when all the accusations go one way. Utterly ridiculous and you should be ashamed of yourself. (But shame is not an emotion shared by those determined to re-write every minute of history in real time.)
If it is OK to say liberals do not support our troops, or liberals care more about murderers and rapists than their victims, why is it wrong to say the “right” are gun loving wing nuts and bask in the politics of hate?
Because neither is “OK”, Gayle. That kind of a question is, well, childish. “Dolly took Greg’s cookie, so why is it wrong for Greg to take Sam’s cookie?”
I am simply pointing out that these comments are no different from comments making generalized and baseless allegations against the “left” or liberals, which are not blocked.
See? Please, tell me you’r e not this simple.
Not surprised with the comments, nor CBC allowing them.
The left are hate
filled. You read it ever day.
Excellent catch!
You are exactly right Wilson.I see hate filled comments every time i read the CBC sites. Always blaming and accusing the our Prime Minister.
The media and political parties that encourage our young adults to voice so much hate and disrespect to our elected citizens need to take a long hard look in the mirror.
There is no rational excuse to defend HATE Gayle.
Without generalizing, it’s true that certain people on “the left” seem to take great pleasure on the CBC website bashing the right for being morally corrupt. Ironically, it backfires by nature of their commentary.
One individual today said lamented it wasn’t John McCain getting hit.
……..the Left’s (very) selective reality…….
And total and utter hypocrisy. Great catch!
Oh Michael.
I wonder where you were when all those other objectionable comments were made. Were you out there railing against the inappropriateness of saying liberals do not support the troops?
Ha ha ha ha ha
What is it about the connections among a gun-sight graphic and a widely-disseminated web link and a democratically-elected politician and today’s events do you not understand ? Any number of rational people are standing by to provide help and possible explanations.
Pardon me Natasha, but you are relying on what a few people have said and determined from that “the left” have all jumped to conclusions. I am part of “the left” and I have done nothing of the sort.
You are guilty of doing exactly what you complain about – jumping to a conclusion based on no evidence at all. There are stupid people on all sides of the political spectrum. Just because some of those stupid people jump to conclusions is no basis to paint the entire side of the spectrum with the same brush.
So here you are, actually alleging that left wingers do not care about the victims. That is astonishingly hypocritical and offensive. Some might even call it very very stupid.
Oh please. Hypocritical much.
Oh wait. It’s wilson. Of COURSE you are hypocritical.
Dear lord. There are some people who STILL say this was the work of Muslim terrorists. I remember the day very well, and I remember the first reports were trying to link this to terrorism.
And to be very clear, since I think I might have to explain this to you, this post is about how unfair it is to a) jump to the conclusion this is about some tea partier avenging his cause, and b) even if the guilty man IS a tea partier avenging his cause, how wrong it is to paint everyone who shares his political affiliation as a murderer.
And then you come along and decide the “left” is “hate”. Because making broad, unsubstantiated stupid generalizations is just so convincing.
Grow up wilson.
No one is defending hate Fay. Dear god woman, try reading what I have actually said.
Oh Gayle.
I am hardly required to address absolutley everything that pisses you and others off about the right, even your solitary example, in order to acknowledge that some leftwing kneejerking in this situation is totally disgusting. I hardly need to denounce such comments you find offensive to all and sundry to all four corners of the earth in order satisfy your hypocritical and perpetual sense of outrage.
Get over yourself.
Ha ha ha ha ha
If it is OK to say liberals do not support our troops, or liberals care more about murderers and rapists than their victims, why is it wrong to say the “right” are gun loving wing nuts and bask in the politics of hate?
i.e.: what you “actually said”.
No one buy’s your pathetic and idiotic attempt at moral equivalence Gayle. Get lost already.
Costas,
Target and gun sight graphics have been utilized dozens of times in infographics. It’s very common.
Nuts are nuts and you can find them anywhere. Amazing how quickly politics is injected into fray. If he had used a knife the headline would have been just as large. As for the CBC, they have been the haven of the far left for decades and it shows.
Some will say the shooter was mentally challenged and it was a cry for help. Watch for the story coming to the CBC. It wont have a headline showing he was just another nut.
It is estimated that 3% of the population is mentally unbalanced. That means approx. 10 million “nuts” (USA) are on the loose and also means this type of tragedy will happen frequently. The only difference in the headlines is someone prominent was involved rather than just another gang shooting.
Dear Michael
Clearly you are simply missing the point. I will spekk it out for you.
People here are complaining that some “left wing” responses to the CBC article are offensive. I am pointing out that the “left” are not the only ones resposible for offensive comments, and that indeed, the right have their own brand of offensiveness.
You seem to agree. Yet you miss the part about how I am suggesting it is hypocritical for some people here to complain about that when they do the same thing.
Is that a little easier for you to understand now?
Do you even understand what “moral equivalence” means? because I kind of think you don’t.
ha ha ha ha ha
Yup.
But tell me, do you think some of the people here would agree with you if this turns out to be a left wing shooter going after a federal judge appointed by George Bush (one of the victims today).
If you all acknowledge that CBC is a liberal media, how is it surprising that the first comment posted/approved was from a non-conservative reader? The insinuation in the blog post is that CBC is censoring comments and, in this case, publishing those from lefties. And, presumably, not those from conservatives.
Yet the statement, “Wake up CBC! Have some integrity!” implies the (first) comment should have been censored?
No, Julia, my blog post requested the CBC show some sensitivity and not allow people to make uninformed opinion about a tragic event. People were killed and the first comment approved was one that suggested it was the work of a right wing kook.
This comment was made without any evidence or knowledge of the situation. I’m not calling for censorship so much as I am calling for the CBC’s realization that there’s a time and a place. Publishing these insensitive and uninformed comments is neither.
Dear Gayle
Clearly you are simply missing the point. I will spell it out for you.
You’re complaining that some right wing comments are offensive. I am pointing out that the “right” are not the only ones responsible for this shooting, and that indeed, the left have their own brand of offensiveness.
You seem to agree. Yet you miss the part about how I am suggesting it is hypocritical for you to complain about that when they do the same thing.
Is that a little easier for you to understand now?
I’m so happy we had this little chat. I’m glad you understand now.
Am I crazy? Or has the font on my blog changed suddenly?
Population has nothing to do with it. The United states has more than 3x the per capita murder rate of any other western democracy. Suggesting that gun violence is an ‘American Value’ may not be totally appropriate, but the fact remains that they do have an appalling gun violence problem that is substantially more pronounced than culturally similar nations.
For context, by last years numbers, you are about as likely to be murdered in the United States as you are in Kenya and you are less likely to be murdered in Cote d’Ivoire.
But it sounds a little self-righteous, don’t you think? To sit there and belittle Americans in the wake of a tragic massacre and pontificate about gun crime?
It’s like having someone say “Canadians are terrible drivers” after reading that a family drove a cliff in B.C.
Not just the CBC site Fay,
take a tour of the Globe and Mail, (sometimes)Macleans and Liblogs… ‘progressive’ hospitality is very hostile towards conservatives, the Deranged Harper Hating Syndrome.
It’s like the Toronto Star attacks on Rob Ford, but every article, every day.
Liblogs had a contest, one of the entrants ‘posted’ was a pic of PMSH being assassinated.
And Liberal Scott Reid in the G&M quoted :
‘Their imperative could not be more clear: kill him. Kill him dead.’
Followed up on Liblogs Red Tory, posted pic of PMSH with 5 guns pointed at his head.
http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/fullcomment/archive/2009/12/17/steve-janke-the-liberals-and-their-kill-harper-fetish.aspx
If you google ‘hate Harper’ progressives even have face book groups:
All Canadians Who Hate Harper, We Hate Harper, and IHateHarper.ca, King Stephen Harper – I Hate Everything About You (youtube video)etc.
Google the same for Ignatieff, and the results are significantly less.
So yes Gayle,
progressives are hate filled.
Looks the same to me.
Ok thanks.
I do not understand why my tax dollars are used to subsidize a chat forum.
Comments in an open forum are generally opinions, which by definition, are personal beliefs or judgments that are not founded on proof or certainty.
It seems to me the larger issue that goes to the heart of your post is really about the moderation of an online forum. While I’m not knowledgeable about such guidelines, the topic has been debated. Does moderation imply anything more than monitoring for expletive language? Or is the role of online moderation to only permit comments that have supporting evidence?
I think that in certain circumstances moderation should be extended to include commentary that is either defamatory, inflammatory and beyond a reasonable level of “fair comment.”
For example, Canada has laws pertaining to the dissemination of hatred. If one cannot write “the dirty jews step up their terrorism on democracy”, it stands to reason that maligning other groups is equally disgraceful. No?
Good point. Judging by the age of the shooter I doubt if politics were involved. The reason should be academic as we are tought right from wrong at a early age. At least we used to be.
I do not understand why my tax dollars are used to subsidize the CBC in general.Or the HRC or the Gun registry or the pride parade or the 10 billion dollar black hole called Indian affairs or the thousands of pork barrel projects every year to buy votes. I do understand that my tax burden goes up every year and my take home pay goes down every year.
I heard on CBC Radio that she was a “fiscal conservative” and was in favour of putting measures in place to curb illegal immigration, including having the National Guard do border patrol, aggressively prosecute human smugglers, and put illegal immigrants at the “back of the line” in terms of getting citizenship.
She didn’t sound very left wing to me.
Some Democrats are not ” Liberals ” and the profile I read on this one seems closer to a Republican or even in accord with many ” Tea Partiers ” even if the Tea Party had a candidate against her.
She voted against Pelosi for leader of the House of Representatives: Not exactly something that would raise the hackles of Conservatives or make Pelosi happy.
In any case, this is a tragic shooting and lets not forget the 9 year old Girl who was also killed and way too many people are jumping on this before all the facts are in gleefully pushing their agendas !
We either have a crazed mentally sick killer or we have some sort of politically motivated assassination and crazy conspiracy theorists on either the Left or Right can have a field day !
Lets hope the Congress Woman recovers and without brain damage and that all of the other wounded survive to their wound and recover fully.
Dear lord. you silly, silly little man.
I have already said that the comments Adrian complains of are silly and unsubstantiated. I know that gets in the way of your little theory about how I am saying only conservatives say stupid things, but if you could actually read the English language you would know I am not saying that at all.
Better luck next time.
Yes wilson. You are totally right. Because if one or two people say something you might misinterpret (either willfully or because you are not smart enough to understand context) it means that every single person who votes the same way believes the same thing.
What is leftist Gayle actually defending?
Well politics may have been involved. He may very well have been a misguided tea partier who believed what he was doing was the right thing to do. That does not mean that every tea partier should be held responsible for his decision.
What I am saying is that I would like the conservatives here to ask themselves if they would honestly not blame all liberals for the actions of one. I think that most, if answering honestly, would have to agree they would blame all for the actions of one. It is quite apparent by the comments already posted here.
What is kursk actually reading? I ask, because if he was reading what I am posting he would not ask such a silly question.
And Gayle….there are STILL people who think George Bush orchastrated 9-11….they are positive, after all, they read it on the internet!!
There are nutcases everywhere – but for many in the left – including the supposed professionals in the media – to start ranting and raving that it was the right, it was Sarah Palin and her cronies, it was all her fault, is criminal Gayle.
THAT is the point!
And yet, Gayle, YOU do it all the time regarding the right.
And no, I am not going to do your work for you and find a “link”.
Dear lord. you silly, silly little woman.
I have already said that the comments some on the right complained of in the past are silly and unsubstantiated. I know that gets in the way of your little theory about how people here are saying only liberals say stupid things and have blamed all of them for the acitons of one……..
(i.e. – “What I am saying is that I would like the conservatives here to ask themselves if they would honestly not blame all liberals for the actions of one. I think that most, if answering honestly, would have to agree they would blame all for the actions of one. It is quite apparent by the comments already posted here.”) -
…….but we can actually read the English language (or what you try to pass off as such) so we know that is exactly what you saying.
“Better luck next time.”
I hope the same doesn’t happen to one of Canada’s politicians however we might object to their opinions or political persuasion.
My guess is that the comment section costs the taxpayer $4 million/year and benefits the few dozen people, who through a battery of user names, probably make 85% of the posts. It’s an expensive baby-sitting service courtesy of our nanny-state for a small group of people, a number of whom probably have some sort of mental issues.
Whether hard left liberal, or hard right conservative, to blame such a ruthless act on someones political leaning is like trying to blame democracy itself. People that do something like that have a personal motive or a very low IQ. The only question should be whether this shooter knew right from wrong. If not, he falls into the nut catagory. Democracy allows all others to get involved without without violence.
Damian Penny – “When the last Che Guevara T-shirt has been thrown out, THEN the left can start lecturing us about violent political imagery.”
EXACTLY!
Oh. I get it now. You are not in a position to address what I am really saying, and not man enough to admit when you are wrong, so now you are just making stuff up.
Ha ha ha ha ha
Oh, I know what your “point” is. I am just saying that “point” is silly, baseless and really really dumb.
But you go on trying to make it.
ha ha ha ha ha
I don’t blame you. It would be a lot of work to find something that exists only in your little mind.
Oh. I get it now. You are not in a position to address what I am really saying, and not man enough to admit when you are wrong, so now you are just making stuff up.
Ha ha ha ha ha
==============
Oh. I get it now. You are not in a position to refute your own words that I quoted you saying, and not mature enought to admit when you are wrong, so now you laughingly claim that I’m making stuff up.
Ha ha ha ha ha
There used to be a poster at Neo and Hunter and other blogs that always ended with ha ha ha. Is that a secret code for liberal trolls.
Nope.
I just like to laugh at silly posts. Sure it is immature but I prefer that to baseless accusations and mindless drivel.
According to a tweet posted on smalldeadanimals
“@antderosa As I knew him he was left-wing, quite liberal and oddly obsessed with the 2012 propbecy”
In other words a left-wing nutbar who tried to shoot a Blue Dog Democrat, presumably for not being left-wing enough.
Seems like the Dems are trying to get out in front of this story by blaming the Tea Party, when in fact it was one of their own that did it.
“I do not understand why my tax dollars are used to subsidize a chat forum.”
Are you talking about the forums and bloggers who get a helping handful from Harper?
As to the motives of the gun-totin’ guy, seems to me they’ll be parsed down to a nub over the next few days. What I can guarantee is that the likes of hate-inspiring media and talkingheads like Parah Salin, Lush Rumbaugh and Ben Gleck, I doubt there’ll be any reflecting in the mirror today. Many people on both sides of the spectrum believe the ‘ends justify the means’…
Which is your usual fare anyway.
How many people have been rushing to blame Sarah Palin?
http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/breaking-news/arizona-shooting-suspect-may-be-linked-to-anti-semitic-group/story-e6freuyi-1225984713213
An internal Department of Homeland Security (DHS) memo quoted by FOX News Channel revealed the gunman – named by the media as Jared Loughner, 22 – is “possibly linked” to American Renaissance.
The group subscribes to an ideology that is “anti-government, anti-immigration, anti -ZOG (Zionist Occupational Government), anti-Semitic,” according to the DHS memo.
Giffords “is the first Jewish female elected to such a high position in the US government. She was also opposite this group’s ideology when it came to immigration debate,” the note said.
Whoops!
Yes, well, one person tweeted this so it MUSt be true.
In any event, if it is true then what – it’s the fault of the “left”?
Speaking of rushing, perhaps you want to wait to see how this all plays out before you rush to the conclusion this has something to do with this American Renaissance group you are so desperate to blame.
“I do not understand why my tax dollars are used to subsidize a chat forum.”
Are you talking about the forums and bloggers who get a helping handful from Harper?
There is a difference between, as the previous poster referred to, chat forums being subsidized by tax dollars via the CBC (a state run broadcaster) and a political entity like the Conservative party and it’s leader giving “a helping handful” to forums and bloggers that share their views.
I didn’t say they were to blame for certain Gayle; just that there were other possibilities to keep in mind that are starting to come forward (which is why I said people were rushing to blame Palin in the first place in my first post); just the same as if it was possible that there were right wing motivations involved. If you bothered to read what I quoted instead of again demonstrating your inherent dishonesty like you inevitably do, you would realize that it said he was “possibly linked” in doing this in the name of American Renaissance. I don’t rush to blind, stupid, and baseless conclusions like you do, Gayle.
Speaking of rushing, perhaps you want to wait to see how this all plays out before you rush to the conclusion that I am “desperate” to place sole blame with this American Renaissance group you are so desperate to say I am blaming.
“Apparently the young man avidly read Marx and Hitler and burned the American flag. To my way of thinking, those are not the values of the Tea Party.”
— Senator Lamar Alexander on CNN’s State of Affairs this morning.
Yup.
Why does it surprise you that people don’t read your posts?
They are very predicatable:
” I am brilliant, you are a stupid conservative”
How much of that do you think a conservative board can take before you get completely ignored as a troll.
A comparison between Judaism (culture, philosophy, language, religion, geography) with political affiliation is one of apples to oranges.
People speculate. Like it or not, this story is politically-based because a congresswoman (and bystanders) was shot in the head, and the CBC continues to be a liberal media despite a conservative government.
If only that is what I said. What I actually did Wilson is point out how hypocritical you are being. Which makes me understand why you would pretend I did something else entirely.
And the posting of the first comment represents a confluence of many things unknown to us. Is it fair of blog posting to criticize the CBC by the first comment posted?
Seems that you, like the lefties you accuse of being quick to jump to early conclusions, do the same.
Oh, you are desperate all right.
You are also using this one allegation to suggest the other allegations are wrong.
In fact, no one know what motivated him, and therefore no conclusions can be drawn about anything.
Though I see you are still trying…
I haven’t jumped to any conclusions. I’ve observed that the CBC comment board has approved a number of inflammatory, defamatory and uninformed speculation.
Jane Fonda on Twitter – @SarahPalinUSA holds responsibility. As does the violence-provoking rhetoric of the Tea Party. It isn’t enough that Palin just removed the map of Giffords district with gun crosshairs off her website. She holds responsibility Progressive Arizona Rep Gabrielle Giffords is shot. In her ads, Sarah Palin had her targeted in a gun site. Inciting to violence.
What was that about desperate?
In fact, no one knows what motivated him, and therefore no conclusions can be drawn about anything.
Well, well; you finally see the light, Gayle. Nice to see that even you can finally come to her senses, though it takes a 100 post thread for it to finally sink in.
A Democratic strategist is advising as follows:
One veteran Democratic operative, who blames overheated rhetoric for the shooting, said President Barack Obama should carefully but forcefully do what his predecessor did.
“They need to deftly pin this on the tea partiers,” said the Democrat. “Just like the Clinton White House deftly pinned the Oklahoma City bombing on the militia and anti-government people.”
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0111/47294_Page2.html
My, my……..
What I said about you being desperate stands. I am not sure what kind of leap of logic makes Jane Fonda’s tweet at all relevant to your desperation, but when you are desperate you just clutch at straws, so…
As for the rest, English language comprehension is obviously not your forte. Allow me to quote from my original post:
“There is nothing wrong with the comments you object to. Sure, they are silly and unsubstantiated…” (here is a link to the definition of “unsubstantiated” for your edification: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/unsubstantiated )
Oh wait, here is another post I made yesterday:
“Well politics may have been involved. He may very well have been a misguided tea partier who believed what he was doing was the right thing to do. That does not mean that every tea partier should be held responsible for his decision.”
Since you obviously do not understand this, let me explain that when someone uses the term “may” they are speculating about a possibility, and not stating it as though it were a fact.
Oh wait. One more for good measure:
“And to be very clear, since I think I might have to explain this to you, this post is about how unfair it is to a) jump to the conclusion this is about some tea partier avenging his cause, and b) even if the guilty man IS a tea partier avenging his cause, how wrong it is to paint everyone who shares his political affiliation as a murderer.”
That is awful. It is kind of like saying a political party supports terrorists because said political party wants to know if our government is condoning torture.
My my indeed.
So you’re saying that you understood from the onset.
Even better.
That is awful. It is kind of like saying a political party desires the destruction of the environment because said political party disagrees that a carbon tax is a bad idea.
So according to you, two wrongs would make a right then.
That was the original point I was addressing. You’re starting to pick this up. My my indeed.
I am saying you never even bothered to read what I said before you jumped to conclusions. Which is ironic since this entire thread is about jumping to conclusions without having any of the facts.
So how about answering the question Gayle.
How much ‘I am brilliant and you are a stupid conservative’ do you think a conservative board can take before you get completely ignored as a troll?
You don’t have to keep re-explaining your point Gayle,
we get it the first time.
Not one conservative commentor on this board is stupid, nor ‘needs to grow up’.
Perhaps if you dropped the superiority attitude in your comments, stopped looking for a fight,
the ‘stupid immature’ conservative commentors here would engage in the kind of debate you seem hungry for.
You have a good grasp on issues, articulate well, and then you ruin by being condensending.
Oh Michael. It is so cute the way you take my pointing out the glaring errors, hypocrisies and inconsistencies in your posts as you teaching me something.
ha ha ha ha ha
ps.
no need to reply, just change your attitude
I don’t know how you guys keep going against Gayle.
I am condescending. Who cares? You are still claiming I said something I did not. I have never claimed brilliance. I have only questioned your posts. .
I attack your arguments. You attack me.
Me neither!
Oh Michael. It is so cute the way you take my pointing out the glaring errors, hypocrisies and inconsistencies in your posts as you teaching me something.
ha ha ha ha ha
Oh Gayle. It is so cute the way you try and point out glaring errors, hypocrisies and inconsistencies in anyone’s posts as if someone would waste time attempting to teach you something when we know you’re incapable of learning anything even remotley requiring critical thought.
ha ha ha ha ha
There is that secret code again. What does it mean. Well, I ran that code thru my secret decoder Dick Tracy ring and guess what it said.
The definition of insanity is doing and saying the same thing over and over and expecting a different result.
Fits Gayle perfectly.
I am saying you never even bothered to read what I said before you jumped to conclusions.
LOL Now that is an ironic statement, if ever there was one.
The killer left a letter saying he was going to kill that B–ch.
His hate for her goes back to 2007 when she invited him to a function. She wrote to the sheriff about him.
Adrian is correct in identifying the manipulative tactic used in CBC comment moderation.
By extension, it highlights the manipulation used by, uh, tax spender enablers (choose your own word) to advance their agenda.
Regardless of what is right or wrong, adult or childish, hyperbole or ellipse; the partisans of the left will be using their bully pulpit of the main stream media (such as the CBC demonstrates; and JournoLista commissar Krugman) to use this to agitate to advance their agenda.
We will see if it works. I suspect not, for a whole cohort of reasons; I suspect it will backfire horribly. The ability challenged left is … ability challenged.
You are starting to sound condensending again Gayle. Whoops!
She loves it.
It is not an accident. I do it on purpose.
Agreed. Regardless of political or other motivations, this was a senseless tragedy against innocent victims.
“Probably a politically motivated shooting.”
You’ve chosen to highlight that cbc post comment — are you serious? So you’re suggesting that had she been a barista or working at a Stucky’s she’d still have been his target? There is a slim, minor chance that this had nothing to do with politics — but even accounting for the deranged nature of the crime, the fact that her name had received heavy press and was often circled by people on the right for ‘attention’ gives plenty of suspicion for this being politically motivated.
Don’t be so sensitive. It’s not as though you’re a muslim who after some nefarious evil was done by some dark-skinned people, you’ve been given the once- and twice-over by everyone just for being you…
No, because tax payer money is going to both.
You left out the relevant bit:
“Is the right so afraid of the left that they have to resort to assassination?”
Is that so surprising either?